FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION · 2020. 3. 10. · The FPPC did not conduct any permanent...
Transcript of FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION · 2020. 3. 10. · The FPPC did not conduct any permanent...
-
COMPLIANCE REVIEW REPORT
FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION
Compliance Review Unit
State Personnel Board
March 11, 2020
-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 2
Scope and Methodology .................................................................................................. 3
Findings and Recommendations ..................................................................................... 6
Examinations ............................................................................................................. 6
Appointments ............................................................................................................. 7
Equal Employment Opportunity ................................................................................. 9
Personal Services Contracts .................................................................................... 10
Mandated Training ................................................................................................... 12
Compensation and Pay ............................................................................................ 14
Leave ....................................................................................................................... 19
Policy and Processes ............................................................................................... 25
Departmental Response ................................................................................................ 28
SPB Reply ..................................................................................................................... 28
-
1 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
INTRODUCTION
Established by the California Constitution, the State Personnel Board (the SPB or Board)
is charged with enforcing and administering the civil service statutes, prescribing
probationary periods and classifications, adopting regulations, and reviewing disciplinary
actions and merit-related appeals. The SPB oversees the merit-based recruitment and
selection process for the hiring of over 200,000 state employees. These employees
provide critical services to the people of California, including but not limited to, protecting
life and property, managing emergency operations, providing education, promoting the
public health, and preserving the environment. The SPB provides direction to
departments through the Board’s decisions, rules, policies, and consultation.
Pursuant to Government Code section 18661, the SPB’s Compliance Review Unit (CRU)
conducts compliance reviews of appointing authorities’ personnel practices in five areas:
examinations, appointments, equal employment opportunity (EEO), personal services
contracts (PSC’s), and mandated training, to ensure compliance with civil service laws
and Board regulations. The purpose of these reviews is to ensure state agencies are in
compliance with merit related laws, rules, and policies and to identify and share best
practices identified during the reviews.
Pursuant to Government Code section 18502, subdivision (c), the SPB and the California
Department of Human Resources (CalHR) may “delegate, share, or transfer between
them responsibilities for programs within their respective jurisdictions pursuant to an
agreement.” SPB and CalHR, by mutual agreement, expanded the scope of program
areas to be audited to include more operational practices that have been delegated to
departments and for which CalHR provides policy direction. Many of these delegated
practices are cost drivers to the state and were not being monitored on a statewide basis.
As such, SPB also conducts compliance reviews of appointing authorities’ personnel
practices to ensure that state departments are appropriately managing the following non-
merit-related personnel functions: compensation and pay, leave, and policy and
processes. These reviews will help to avoid and prevent potential costly litigation related
to improper personnel practices, and deter waste, fraud, and abuse.
The SPB conducts these reviews on a three-year cycle.
The CRU may also conduct special investigations in response to a specific request or
when the SPB obtains information suggesting a potential merit-related violation.
-
2 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
It should be noted that this report only contains findings from this hiring authority’s
compliance review. Other issues found in SPB appeals and special investigations as well
as audit and review findings by other agencies such as the CalHR and the California State
Auditor are reported elsewhere.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The CRU conducted a routine compliance review of the Fair Political Practices
Commission (FPPC) personnel practices in the areas of examinations, appointments,
EEO, PSC’s, mandated training, compensation and pay, leave, and policy and processes.
The following table summarizes the compliance review findings.
Area Finding
Examinations Examinations Complied with Civil Service Laws and
Board Rules
Appointments Probationary Evaluations Were Not Timely
Equal Employment Opportunity
Equal Employment Opportunity Program Complied with Civil Service Laws and Board Rules
Personal Services Contracts
Unions Were Not Notified of Personal Services Contracts
Mandated Training Ethics Training Was Not Provided for All Filers in a Timely
Manner
Compensation and Pay Incorrect Application of Compensation Laws, Rules, and
CalHR Policies and Guidelines
Compensation and Pay Alternate Range Movements Complied with Civil Service
Laws, Board Rules, and/or CalHR Policies and Guidelines
Compensation and Pay Out of Class Pay Commenced before the 91st Day
Leave Positive Paid Employees’ Tracked Hours Complied with Civil Service Laws, Board Rules, and/or CalHR Policies
and Guidelines
Leave Administrative Time Off Authorizations Complied with
Civil Service Laws, Board Rules, and/or CalHR Policies and Guidelines
Leave Leave Activity and Correction Certification Forms Were
Not Completed For All Leave Records
Leave Leave Reduction Plans Complied with Civil Service Laws,
Board Rules, and CalHR Policies and Guidelines
-
3 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
Area Finding
Policy Nepotism Policy Complied with Civil Service Laws, Board
Rules, and/or CalHR Policies and Guidelines
Policy Workers’ Compensation Process Complied with Civil
Service Laws, Board Rules, and/or CalHR Policies and Guidelines
Policy Performance Appraisal Were Not Provided to All
Employee
A color-coded system is used to identify the severity of the violations as follows:
Red = Very Serious
Orange = Serious
Yellow = Technical
Green = In Compliance
BACKGROUND
The FPPC is a five-member independent, non-partisan commission that has primary
responsibility for the impartial and effective administration of the Political Reform Act. The
Political Reform Act regulates campaign financing, conflicts of interest, lobbying, and
governmental ethics. The FPPC’s objectives are to ensure that public officials act in a fair
and unbiased manner in the governmental decision-making process, to promote
transparency in government, and to foster public trust in the political system. As of
July 1, 2019, the FPPC has approximately 80 employees and 3 divisions.
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
The scope of the compliance review was limited to reviewing the FPPC’s examinations,
appointments, EEO program, PSC’s, mandated training, compensation and pay, leave,
and policy and processes1. The primary objective of the review was to determine if the
FPPC’s personnel practices, policies, and procedures complied with state civil service
laws and Board regulations, Bargaining Unit Agreements, CalHR policies and guidelines,
CalHR Delegation Agreements, and to recommend corrective action where deficiencies
were identified.
A cross-section of the FPPC’s examinations were selected for review to ensure that
samples of various examination types, classifications, and levels were reviewed. The
1 Timeframes of the compliance review varied depending on the area of review. Please refer to each section for specific compliance review timeframes.
-
4 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
CRU examined the documentation that the FPPC provided, which included examination
plans, examination bulletins, job analyses, and scoring results.
The FPPC did not conduct any permanent withhold actions during the compliance review
period.
A cross-section of the FPPC’s appointments were selected for review to ensure that
samples of various appointment types, classifications, and levels were reviewed. The
CRU examined the documentation that the FPPC provided, which included Notice of
Personnel Action (NOPA) forms, Request for Personnel Actions (RPA’s), vacancy
postings, certification lists, transfer movement worksheets, employment history records,
correspondence, and probation reports.
The FPPC did not conduct any unlawful appointment investigations during the compliance
review period.
The FPPC’s appointments were also selected for review to ensure the FPPC applied
salary regulations accurately and correctly processed employees’ compensation and pay.
The CRU examined the documentation that the FPPC provided, which included
employees’ employment and pay history and any other relevant documentation such as
certifications, degrees, and/or the appointee’s application. Additionally, the CRU reviewed
specific documentation for the following personnel functions related to compensation and
pay: alternate range movements, and out-of-class assignments.
During the compliance review period, the FPPC did not issue or authorize any hiring
above minimum requests, red circle rate requests, arduous pay, bilingual pay, and
monthly pay differentials.
The review of the FPPC’s EEO program included examining written EEO policies and
procedures; the EEO Officer’s role, duties, and reporting relationship; the internal
discrimination complaint process; the reasonable accommodation program; the
discrimination complaint process; and the Disability Advisory Committee (DAC).
The FPPC’s PSC’s were also reviewed.2 It was beyond the scope of the compliance
review to make conclusions as to whether the FPPC’s justifications for the contracts were
2If an employee organization requests the SPB to review any personal services contract during the SPB compliance review period or prior to the completion of the final compliance review report, the SPB will not audit the contract. Instead, the SPB will review the contract pursuant to its statutory and regulatory process. In this instance, none of the reviewed PSC’s were challenged.
-
5 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
legally sufficient. The review was limited to whether the FPPC’s practices, policies, and
procedures relative to PSC’s complied with procedural requirements.
The FPPC’s mandated training program was reviewed to ensure all employees required
to file statements of economic interest were provided ethics training, and that all
supervisors were provided supervisory training and sexual harassment prevention
training within statutory timelines.
The CRU also identified the FPPC’s employees whose current annual leave, or vacation
leave credits, exceeded established limits. The CRU reviewed a cross-section of these
identified employees to ensure that employees who have significant “over-the-cap” leave
balances have a leave reduction plan in place. Additionally, the CRU asked the FPPC to
provide a copy of their leave reduction policy.
The CRU reviewed the FPPC’s Leave Activity and Correction Certification forms to verify
that the FPPC created a monthly internal audit process to verify all leave input into any
leave accounting system was keyed accurately and timely. The CRU selected a small
cross-section of the FPPC’s units in order to ensure they maintained accurate and timely
leave accounting records. Additionally, the CRU reviewed a selection of the FPPC
employees who used Administrative Time Off (ATO) in order to ensure that ATO was
appropriately administered. Further, the CRU reviewed a selection of FPPC positive paid
employees whose hours are tracked during the compliance review period in order to
ensure that they adhered to procedural requirements.
During the compliance review period, the FPPC did not have any employees with non-
qualifying pay period transactions.
Moreover, the CRU reviewed the FPPC’s policies and processes concerning nepotism,
workers’ compensation, and performance appraisals. The review was limited to whether
the FPPC’s policies and processes adhered to procedural requirements.
On February 7, 2020, an exit conference was held with the FPPC to explain and discuss
the CRU’s initial findings and recommendations. The CRU received and carefully
reviewed the FPPC’s written response on February 26, 2020, which is attached to this
final compliance review report.
-
6 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Examinations
Examinations to establish an eligible list must be competitive and of such character as
fairly to test and determine the qualifications, fitness, and ability of competitors to perform
the duties of the class of position for which he or she seeks appointment. (Gov. Code, §
18930.) Examinations may be assembled or unassembled, written or oral, or in the form
of a demonstration of skills, or any combination of those tests. (Ibid.) The Board
establishes minimum qualifications for determining the fitness and qualifications of
employees for each class of position and for applicants for examinations. (Gov. Code, §
18931, subd. (a).) Within a reasonable time before the scheduled date for the
examination, the designated appointing power shall announce or advertise the
examination for the establishment of eligible lists. (Gov. Code, § 18933, subd. (a).) The
advertisement shall contain such information as the date and place of the examination
and the nature of the minimum qualifications. (Ibid.) Every applicant for examination shall
file an application with the department or a designated appointing power as directed by
the examination announcement. (Gov. Code, § 18934, subd. (a)(1).) The final earned
rating of each person competing in any examination is to be determined by the weighted
average of the earned ratings on all phases of the examination. (Gov. Code, § 18936.)
Each competitor shall be notified in writing of the results of the examination when the
employment list resulting from the examination is established. (Gov. Code, § 18938.5.)
During the period under review, August 1, 2018, through July 31, 2019, the FPPC
conducted one examination. The CRU reviewed that examination, which is listed below:
Classification Exam Type Exam Components Final File
Date
No. of
Apps
General Counsel, Career Executive Assignment (CEA)
Open Qualification
Appraisal Panel (QAP) 3
Until Filled
1
FINDING NO. 1 – Examinations Complied with Civil Service Laws and Board Rules
The CRU reviewed one open examination which the FPPC administered in order to create
an eligible list from which to make appointments. The FPPC published and distributed
3 The QAP interview is the oral component of an examination whereby competitors appear before a panel of two or more evaluators. Candidates are rated and ranked against one another based on an assessment of their ability to perform in a job classification.
-
7 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
examination bulletins containing the required information for all examinations.
Applications received by the FPPC were accepted prior to the final filing date. Applicants
were notified about the next phase of the examination process. After all phases of the
examination process were completed, the score of each competitor was computed, and
a list of eligible candidates was established. The examination results listed the names of
all successful competitors arranged in order of the score received by rank. The CRU found
no deficiencies in the examinations that the FPPC conducted during the compliance
review period.
Appointments
In all cases not excepted or exempted by Article VII of the California Constitution, the
appointing power must fill positions by appointment, including cases of transfers,
reinstatements, promotions, and demotions in strict accordance with the Civil Service Act
and Board rules. (Gov. Code, § 19050.) The hiring process for eligible candidates chosen
for job interviews shall be competitive and be designed and administered to hire
candidates who will be successful. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 250, subd. (b).) Interviews
shall be conducted using job-related criteria. (Ibid.) Persons selected for appointment
shall satisfy the minimum qualifications of the classification to which he or she is
appointed or have previously passed probation and achieved permanent status in that
same classification. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 250, subd. (d).) While persons selected
for appointment may meet some or most of the preferred or desirable qualifications, they
are not required to meet all the preferred or desirable qualifications. (Ibid.) This section
does not apply to intra-agency job reassignments. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 250, subd.
(e).)
During the period under review, August 1, 2018, through July 31, 2019, the FPPC made
30 appointments. The CRU reviewed 14 of those appointments, which are listed below:
Classification Appointment
Type Tenure Time Base
No. of
Appts.
CEA, A CEA Permanent Full Time 1
Assistant Chief Counsel Certification List Permanent Full Time 1
Budget Analyst Certification List Permanent Full Time 1
FPPC Counsel Certification List Permanent Full Time 1
Information Technology Technician
Certification List Limited Term Full Time 1
Political Reform Consultant II
Certification List Permanent Full Time 2
-
8 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
Classification Appointment
Type Tenure Time Base
No. of
Appts.
Special Investigator Certification List Limited Term Full Time 1
Staff Services Analyst Certification List Permanent Full Time 1
Staff Services Manager I Certification List Permanent Full Time 1
FPPC Counsel Reinstatement Permanent Full Time 1
FPPC Counsel Transfer Permanent Full Time 1
Staff Services Analyst Transfer Permanent Full Time 1
Supervising Attorney Transfer Permanent Full Time 1
FINDING NO. 2 – Probationary Evaluations Were Not Timely
Summary: The FPPC did not provide, in a timely manner, 8 probationary reports
of performance for 4 of 14 appointments reviewed by the CRU, as
reflected in the table below.
Classification Appointment Type Number of
Appointments
Total Number of Late Probation
Reports
Assistant Chief Counsel Certification List 1 2
Political Reform Consultant I
Certification List 1 3
FPPC Counsel Transfer 1 2
Supervising Attorney Transfer 1 1
Criteria: The service of a probationary period is required when an employee
enters or is promoted in the state civil service by permanent
appointment from an employment list. (Gov. Code, § 19171.) During
the probationary period, the appointing power shall evaluate the work
and efficiency of a probationer in the manner and at such periods as
the department rules may require. (Gov. Code, § 19172.) A report of
the probationer’s performance shall be made to the employee at
sufficiently frequent intervals to keep the employee adequately
informed of progress on the job. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.795.)
A written appraisal of performance shall be made to the Department
within 10 days after the end of each one-third portion of the
probationary period. (Ibid.) The Board’s record retention rules require
-
9 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
that appointing powers retain all probationary reports for five years
from the date the record is created. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 26,
subd. (a)(3).)
Severity: Serious. The probationary period is the final step in the selection
process to ensure that the individual selected can successfully
perform the full scope of their job duties. Failing to use the
probationary period to assist an employee in improving his or her
performance or terminating the appointment upon determination that
the appointment is not a good job/person match is unfair to the
employee and serves to erode the quality of state government.
Cause: The FPPC provides that with respect to the four employees who
received untimely reports, workload demands and mission-critical
initiatives of their respective supervisors resulted in the untimely
completion of probation reports.
Corrective Action: Within 60 days of the date of this report, the FPPC must submit to the
SPB a written corrective action response which addresses the
corrections the department will implement to ensure conformity with
California Code of Regulations, title 2, section 599.795. Copies of
relevant documentation demonstrating that the corrective action has
been implemented must be included with the corrective action
response.
Equal Employment Opportunity
Each state agency is responsible for an effective EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19790.)
The appointing power for each state agency has the major responsibility for monitoring
the effectiveness of its EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19794.) To that end, the appointing
power must issue a policy statement committed to EEO; issue procedures for filing,
processing, and resolving discrimination complaints; and cooperate with the CalHR, in
accordance with Civil Code section 1798.24, subdivisions (o) and (p), by providing access
to all required files, documents and data necessary to carry out these mandates. (Ibid.)
In addition, the appointing power must appoint, at the managerial level, an EEO Officer,
who shall report directly to, and be under the supervision of, the director of the department
to develop, implement, coordinate, and monitor the department’s EEO program. (Gov.
Code, § 19795, subd. (a).)
-
10 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
Pursuant to Government Code section 19795, subdivision (a), in a state agency with less
than 500 employees, like FPPC, the EEO Officer may be the Personnel Officer.
Each state agency must establish a separate committee of employees who are individuals
with a disability, or who have an interest in disability issues, to advise the head of the
agency on issues of concern to employees with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 19795, subd.
(b)(1).) The department must invite all employees to serve on the committee and take
appropriate steps to ensure that the final committee is comprised of members who have
disabilities or who have an interest in disability issues. (Gov. Code, § 19795, subd. (b)(2).)
After reviewing the policies, procedures, and programs necessary for compliance with the
EEO program’s role and responsibilities according to statutory and regulatory guidelines,
the CRU determined that the FPPC EEO program provided employees with information
and guidance on the EEO process including instructions on how to file discrimination
claims. Furthermore, the EEO program outlines the roles and responsibilities of the EEO
Officer, as well as supervisors and managers. The EEO Officer, who is at a managerial
level, reports directly to the Executive Director of the FPPC. In addition, the FPPC has an
established DAC, which reports to the Executive Director on issues affecting persons with
disabilities. The FPPC also provided evidence of its efforts to promote EEO in its hiring
and employment practices, and to increase its hiring of persons with disabilities.
Accordingly, the FPPC EEO program complied with civil service laws and Board rules.
Personal Services Contracts
A PSC includes any contract, requisition, or purchase order under which labor or personal
services is a significant, separately identifiable element, and the business or person
performing the services is an independent contractor that does not have status as an
employee of the state. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 547.59.) The California Constitution has
an implied civil service mandate limiting the state’s authority to contract with private
entities to perform services the state has historically or customarily performed.
Government Code section 19130, subdivision (a), however, codifies exceptions to the
civil service mandate where PSC’s achieve cost savings for the state. PSC’s that are of
a type enumerated in subdivision (b) of Government Code section 19130 are also
permissible. Subdivision (b) contracts include, but are not limited to, private contracts for
a new state function, services that are not available within state service, services that are
incidental to a contract for the purchase or lease of real or personal property, and services
that are of an urgent, temporary, or occasional nature.
FINDING NO. 3 – Equal Employment Opportunity Program Complied With All Civil Service Laws and Board Rules
-
11 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
For cost-savings PSC’s, a state agency is required to notify SPB of its intent to execute
such a contract. (Gov. Code, § 19131.) For subdivision (b) contracts, the SPB reviews
the adequacy of the proposed or executed contract at the request of an employee
organization representing state employees. (Gov. Code, § 19132.)
During the period under review, August 1, 2018, through July 31, 2019, the FPPC had
two PSC’s that were in effect. The CRU reviewed both of those contracts, which are listed
below:
Vendor Services Contract
Dates Contract Amount
Justification Identified?
Union Notified
Escribers Transcription
Services 12/2018 - 11/2020
$9,000 Yes No
Unleashing Leaders
Leadership Training
8/2018 - 6/2020
$15,000 Yes No
FINDING NO. 4 – Unions Were Not Notified of Personal Services Contracts
Summary: The FPPC did not notify unions prior to entering into both of the
PSC’s reviewed.
Criteria: The contract shall not be executed until the state agency proposing
to execute the contract has notified all organizations that represent
state employees who perform the type of work to be contracted.
(Gov. Code, § 19132, subd. (b)(1).)
Severity: Serious. Unions must be notified of impending PSC’s in order to
ensure they are aware contracts are being proposed for work that
their members could perform.
Cause: The FPPC states that they determined there were no organizations
performing the services, therefore, no organizations were notified.
However, it will update its internal procedures to ensure employee
organizations are notified before executing a PSC.
Corrective Action: It is the contracting department’s responsibility to identify and notify
any unions whose members could potentially perform the work to be
contracted prior to executing the PSC. The PSCs reviewed during
-
12 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
this compliance review involved transcription and training services,
functions that various rank-and-file civil service classifications
perform. Within 60 days of the date of this report, the FPPC must
submit to the SPB a written corrective action response which
addresses the corrections the department will implement to ensure
conformity with the requirements of Government Code section
19132. Copies of relevant documentation demonstrating that the
corrective action has been implemented must be included with the
corrective action response.
Mandated Training
Each member, officer, or designated employee of a state agency who is required to file a
statement of economic interest (referred to as “filers”) because of the position he or she
holds with the agency is required to take an orientation course on the relevant ethics
statutes and regulations that govern the official conduct of state officials. (Gov. Code, §§
11146 & 11146.1.) State agencies are required to offer filers the orientation course on a
semi-annual basis. (Gov. Code, § 11146.1.) New filers must be trained within six months
of appointment and at least once during each consecutive period of two calendar years,
commencing on the first odd-numbered year thereafter. (Gov. Code, § 11146.3.)
Upon the initial appointment of any employee designated in a supervisory position, the
employee shall be provided a minimum of 80 hours of training, as prescribed by the
CalHR. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subd. (b).) The training addresses such topics as the role
of the supervisor, techniques of supervision, performance standards, and sexual
harassment and abusive conduct prevention. (Gov. Code, §§ 12950.1, subds. (a), (b), &
19995.4, subd. (b).)
Additionally, the training must be successfully completed within the term of the
employee’s probationary period or within six months of the initial appointment, unless it
is demonstrated that to do so creates additional costs or that the training cannot be
completed during this time period due to limited availability of supervisory training
courses. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subd. (c).) As to the sexual harassment and abusive-
conduct prevention component, the training must thereafter be provided to supervisors
once every two years. (Gov. Code, § 12950.1.)
Within 12 months of the initial appointment of an employee to a management or CEA
position, the employee shall be provided leadership training and development, as
prescribed by CalHR. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subds. (d) & (e).) For management
-
13 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
employees the training must be a minimum of 40 hours and for CEAs the training must
be a minimum of 20 hours. (Ibid.) Thereafter, for both categories of appointment, the
employee must be provided a minimum of 20 hours of leadership training on a biennial
basis. (Ibid.)
The Board may conduct reviews of any appointing power’s personnel practices to ensure
compliance with civil service laws and Board regulations. (Gov. Code, § 18661, subd.
(a).) In particular, the Board may audit personnel practices related to such matters as
selection and examination procedures, appointments, promotions, the management of
probationary periods, and any other area related to the operation of the merit principle in
state civil service. (Ibid.) Accordingly, the CRU reviews documents and records related to
training that appointing powers are required by the afore-cited laws to provide its
employees.
The CRU reviewed the FPPC’s mandated training program that was in effect during the
compliance review period, August 1, 2017, to July 31, 2019. The FPPC’s supervisory
training and sexual harassment training were found to be in compliance, while the FPPC’s
ethics training was found to be out of compliance.
FINDING NO. 5 – Ethics Training Was Not Provided for All Filers in a Timely Manner
Summary: The FPPC provided ethics training to all 37 existing filers. However
the FPPC did not provide ethics training to 8 of 13 new filers within 6
months of their appointment.
Criteria: New filers must be provided ethics training within six months of
appointment. Existing filers must be trained at least once during each
consecutive period of two calendar years commencing on the first
odd-numbered year thereafter. (Gov. Code, § 11146.3, subd. (b).)
Severity: Very Serious. The department does not ensure that its filers are
aware of prohibitions related to their official position and influence.
Cause: The FPPC states that the failure to timely provide ethics training to
eight new filers was due to insufficient internal procedures.
Corrective Action: Within 60 days of the date of this report, the FPPC must submit to the
SPB a written corrective action response which addresses the
corrections the department will implement to ensure that all filers are
-
14 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
provided ethics training within the time periods prescribed. Copies of
relevant documentation demonstrating that the corrective action has
been implemented must be included with the corrective action
response.
Compensation and Pay
Salary Determination
The pay plan for state civil service consists of salary ranges and steps established by
CalHR. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.666.) Several salary rules dictate how departments
calculate and determine an employee’s salary rate4 upon appointment depending on the
appointment type, the employee’s state employment and pay history, and tenure.
Typically, agencies appoint employees to the minimum rate of the salary range for the
class. Special provisions for appointments above the minimum exist to meet special
recruitment needs and to accommodate employees who transfer into a class from another
civil service class and are already receiving salaries above the minimum.
During the period under review, August 1, 2018, through July 31, 2019, the FPPC made
30 appointments. The CRU reviewed 13 of those appointments to determine if the FPPC
applied salary regulations accurately and correctly processed employees’ compensation,
which are listed below:
Classification Appointment
Type Tenure Time Base
Salary (Monthly
Rate)
Assistant Chief Counsel Certification
List Permanent Full Time $12,406
Budget Analyst Certification
List Permanent Full Time $5,224
FPPC Counsel Certification
List Permanent Full Time $5,602
Information Technology Technician
Certification List Permanent Full Time
$3,362
Political Reform Consultant II
Certification List Permanent
Full Time $5,759
4 “Rate” is any one of the salary rates in the resolution by CalHR which establishes the salary ranges and steps of the Pay Plan (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, section 599.666).
-
15 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
Classification Appointment
Type Tenure Time Base
Salary (Monthly
Rate)
Political Reform Consultant II
Certification List Permanent
Full Time $5,759
Special Investigator Certification
List Permanent Full Time $6,539
Staff Services Analyst Certification
List Permanent Full Time $4,158
Staff Services Manager I Certification
List Permanent Full Time $7,183
FPPC Counsel Reinstatement Permanent Full Time $7,098
FPPC Counsel Transfer Permanent Full Time $6,118
Staff Services Analyst Transfer Permanent Full Time $3,571
Supervising Attorney Transfer Permanent Full Time $11,828
FINDING NO. 6 – Incorrect Application of Salary Determination Laws, Rules, and CalHR Policies and Guidelines for Appointment
Summary: The CRU found the following errors in the FPPC’s determination of
employee compensation:
Classification Description of Findings Criteria
1. FPPC Counsel
Incorrect salary determination for a permissive reinstatement upon return from a permanent separation. The employee should have received the minimum salary rate of Range C. The salary rate shall not exceed the rate the employee would receive if reinstated or reappointed to the same classification from which they separated.
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, §599.677
2. Staff Services Analyst
Incorrect salary determination for a list appointment. Employee should not have received a five percent salary increase. Employee was entitled to receive the range differential which was 4.46 percent.
Cal. Code Regs., tit.2, §599.674
-
16 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
Criteria: Departments are required to calculate and apply salary rules for each
appointed employee accurately based on the pay plan for the state
civil service. All civil service classes have salary ranges with
minimum and maximum rates. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.666.)
Severity: Very Serious. The FPPC failed to comply with the state civil service
pay plan. Incorrectly applying compensation laws and rules in
accordance with CalHR’s policies and guidelines results in civil
service employees receiving incorrect and/or inappropriate pay
amounts.
Cause: 1. The FPPC states that the incorrect salary determination for the
FPPC Counsel was the result of human error; the salary was
incorrectly keyed even though the amount in the supporting
document was correct.
2. The FPPC states that the incorrect salary determination for the
Staff Services Analyst resulted from an incorrect reading of the law
which was interpreted as allowing a 5% salary increase, resulting in
an increase that was .54% above the allowable amount.
Corrective Action: Within 60 days of the date of this report, the FPPC must submit to the
SPB a written corrective action response which addresses the
corrections the department will implement to ensure that employees
are compensated correctly. The FPPC must establish an audit
system to correct current compensation transactions as well as
future transactions. Copies of relevant documentation demonstrating
that the corrective action has been implemented must be included
with the corrective action response.
Alternate Range Movement Salary Determination (within same classification)
If an employee qualifies under established criteria and moves from one alternate range
to another alternate range of a class, the employee shall receive an increase or a
decrease equivalent to the total of the range differential between the maximum salary
rates of the alternate ranges. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.681.) However, in many
instances, the CalHR provides salary rules departments must use when employees move
between alternate ranges. These rules are described in the alternate range criteria.
(CalHR Pay Scales). When no salary rule or method is cited in the alternate range criteria,
departments must default to Rule 599.681.
-
17 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
During the period under review, May 1, 2018, through April 30, 2019, FPPC employees
made five alternate range movements within a classification. The CRU reviewed all five
alternate range movements to determine if the FPPC applied salary regulations
accurately and correctly processed employee’s compensation, which are listed below:
Classification Prior
Range Current Range
Time Base Salary
(Monthly Rate)
FPPC Counsel B C Full Time $6,760
FPPC Counsel - Enforcement
C D Full Time $7,524
Management Services Technician
A B Full Time $3,186
Special Investigator A B Full Time $4,868
Special Investigator B C Full Time $5,823
FINDING NO. 7 – Alternate Range Movements Complied with Civil Service Laws, Board Rules, and CalHR Policies and Guidelines
The CRU determined that the alternate range movements the FPPC made during the
compliance review period satisfied civil service laws, Board rules and CalHR policies and
guidelines.
Out-of-Class Assignments and Pay
For excluded5 and most rank and file employees, out-of-class (OOC) work is defined as
performing, more than 50 percent of the time, the full range of duties and responsibilities
allocated to an existing class and not allocated to the class in which the person has a
current, legal appointment. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.810, subd. (a)(2).) A higher
classification is one with a salary range maximum that is any amount higher than the
salary range maximum of the classification to which the employee is appointed. (Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.810, subd. (a)(3).)
According to the Classification and Pay Guide, OOC assignments should only be used
as a last resort to accommodate temporary staffing needs. All civil service alternatives
5 “Excluded employee” means an employee as defined in section 3527, subd. (b) of the Government Code (Ralph C. Dills Act) except those excluded employees who are designated managerial pursuant to section 18801.1 of the Government Code.
-
18 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
should be explored first before using OOC assignments. However, certain MOU
provisions and the California Code of Regulations, title 2, section 599.810 allow for short-
term OOC assignments to meet temporary staffing needs. Should OOC work become
necessary, the assignment would be made pursuant to the applicable MOU provisions or
salary regulations. Before assigning the OOC work, the department should have a plan
to correct the situation before the 120-day time period expires. (Classification and Pay
Guide Section 375.)
During the period under review, May 1, 2018, through April 30, 2019, the FPPC issued
OOC pay to three employees. The CRU reviewed all three OOC assignments to ensure
compliance with applicable MOU provisions, salary regulations, and CalHR policies and
guidelines. These are listed below:
FINDING NO. 8 – Out of Class Pay Commenced before the 91st Day
Summary: The CRU found the following payroll error in the FPPC’s issuing of OOC pay:
Classification Area Description of Finding Criteria
Assistant Chief Counsel
Out of Class Pay
Employee was compensated prior to the 91st day.
Pay Differential 101
Criteria: Employees may be compensated for performing duties of a higher
classification provided that: the assignment is made in advance in
writing and the employee is given a copy of the assignment; and the
duties performed by the employee are not described in a training and
development assignment and further, taken as a whole are fully
consistent with the types of jobs described in the specification for the
higher classification; and the employee does not perform such duties
Classification Bargaining
Unit Out-of-Class Classification
Time Frame
Assistant Chief Counsel M02 General Counsel
(CEA B) 5/14/18 – 9/28/18
Chief of Administration and Technology Division, CEA B
M01 Executive Director 7/23/18 - 6/28/19
Program Specialist II R01 Supervising
Management Auditor
11/30/18 – 3/29/19
-
19 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
for more than 120 days in a fiscal year. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, §
599.810, subd. (b)(1)(3)(4).)
Managerial OOC compensation is not delegated to any appointing
power. Requests for payment of managerial OOC must be submitted
and approved by CalHR (Pay Differential 101). Managerial OOC
compensation will commence on the 91st day. Compensation shall
not exceed nine months. (Ibid.)
Severity: Very Serious. The FPPC failed to comply with the state civil service
pay plan by incorrectly applying compensation laws and rules in
accordance with CalHR’s policies and guidelines. This results in civil
service employees receiving incorrect and/or inappropriate
compensation.
Cause: The FPPC states that the Political Reform Act mandates that the
FPPC be permanently staffed with a General Counsel, and unique
circumstances arose which presented the FPPC with either having
an attorney working OOC as General Counsel, or failing to execute
its statutory mission.
Corrective Action: Within 60 days of the date of this report, the FPPC must submit to the
SPB a written corrective action response which addresses the
corrections the department will implement to ensure conformity with
California Code of Regulations, title 2, section 599.810, and Pay
Differential 101. Copies of relevant documentation demonstrating
that the corrective action has been implemented must be included
with the corrective action response.
Additionally, when the FPPC isn’t sure of the proper human
resources/compensation action to take, they must reach out to
CalHR for guidance and direction prior to making the applicable
hiring decision, in order to adhere to applicable rules and regulations.
Leave
Positive Paid Employees
Actual Time Worked (ATW) is a method that can be used to keep track of a Temporary
Authorization Utilization (TAU) employee’s time to ensure that the Constitutional limit of
-
20 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
9 months in any 12 consecutive months is not exceeded. The ATW method of counting
time is used in order to continue the employment status for an employee until the
completion of an examination, for seasonal type work, while attending school, or for
consulting services.
An employee is appointed TAU-ATW when he/she is not expected to work all of the
working days of a month. When counting 189 days, every day worked, including partial
days6 worked and paid absences, 7 is counted. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 265.1, subd.
(b).) The hours worked in one day is not limited by this rule. (Ibid.) The 12-consecutive
month timeframe begins by counting the first pay period worked as the first month of the
12-consecutive month timeframe. (Ibid.) The employee shall serve no longer than 189
days in a 12 consecutive month period. (Ibid.) A new 189-days working limit in a 12-
consecutive month timeframe may begin in the month immediately following the month
that marks the end of the previous 12-consecutive month timeframe. (Ibid.)
It is an ATW appointment because the employee does not work each workday of the
month, and it might become desirable or necessary for the employee to work beyond nine
calendar months. The appointing power shall monitor and control the days worked to
ensure the limitations set forth are not exceeded. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 265.1, subd.
(f).)
For student assistants, graduate student assistants, youth aides, and seasonal
classifications a maximum work-time limit of 1500 hours within 12 consecutive months
may be used rather than the 189-day calculation. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 265.1, subd.
(d).)
Generally, permanent intermittent employees may work up to 1,500 hours in any calendar
year. (Applicable Bargaining Unit Agreements.) However, Bargaining Unit 6 employees
may work up to 2,000 hours in any calendar year.
Additionally, according to Government Code section 21224, retired annuitant
appointments shall not exceed a maximum of 960 hours in any fiscal year (July-June),
regardless of the number of state employers, without reinstatement, loss or interruption
of benefits.
6 For example, two hours or ten hours counts as one day. 7 For example, vacation, sick leave, compensating time off, etc.
-
21 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
At the time of the review, the FPPC had one positive paid employee. The CRU reviewed
the positive paid appointment to ensure compliance with applicable laws, regulations,
policies and guidelines, which are listed below:
Classification Time Base Time Frame Time Worked
Program Specialist II, Franchise Tax Board
Intermittent 7/1/2018-5/30/2019
958 Hours
FINDING NO. 9 – Positive Paid Employee’s Tracked Hours Complied with Civil Service Laws, Board Rules, and/or CalHR Policies and Guidelines
The CRU found no deficiencies in the positive paid employee’s time reviewed during the
compliance review period. The FPPC provided sufficient justification and adhered to
applicable laws, regulations and CalHR policy and guidelines for positive paid employees.
Administrative Time Off
ATO is a form of paid administrative leave status initiated by appointing authorities for a
variety of reasons. (Human Resources Manual Section 2121.) Most often, ATO is used
when an employee cannot come to work because of a pending investigation, fitness for
duty evaluation, or when work facilities are unavailable. (Ibid.) ATO can also be granted
when employees need time off for reasons such as blood or organ donation; extreme
weather preventing safe travel to work; states of emergency; voting; and when employees
need time off to attend special events. (Ibid.)
During the period under review, May 1, 2018, through April 30, 2019, the FPPC placed
two employees on ATO. The CRU reviewed those ATO appointments to ensure
compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and CalHR policy and guidelines, which are
listed below:
Classification Time Frame No. of Days on ATO
Attorney IV 5/23/2018-5/25/2018 3
Program Specialist II, FTB 4/15/2019-4/19/2019 3
-
22 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
FINDING NO. 10 – Administrative Time Off Authorizations Complied with Civil Service Laws, Board Rules, and/or CalHR Policies and Guidelines
The CRU found no deficiencies in the ATO transactions reviewed during the compliance
review period. The FPPC provided the proper documentation justifying the use of ATO
and adhered to applicable laws, regulations and CalHR policy and guidelines.
Leave Auditing and Timekeeping
Departments must keep complete and accurate time and attendance records for each
employee and officer employed within the agency over which it has jurisdiction. (Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.665.)
Departments are directed to create a monthly internal audit process to verify all leave
input into any leave accounting system is keyed accurately and timely. (Human
Resources Manual Section 2101.) Departments shall create an audit process to review
and correct leave input errors on a monthly basis. The review of leave accounting records
shall be completed by the pay period following the pay period in which the leave was
keyed into the leave accounting system. (Ibid.) If an employee’s attendance record is
determined to have errors or it is determined that the employee has insufficient balances
for a leave type used, the attendance record must be amended. (Ibid.) Attendance
records shall be corrected by the pay period following the pay period in which the error
occurred. (Ibid.) Accurate and timely attendance reporting is required of all departments
and is subject to audit. (Ibid.)
During the period under review, February 1, 2019, through April 30, 2019, the FPPC
reported 2 units comprised of 28 active employees. The pay periods and timesheets
reviewed by the CRU are summarized below:
Timesheet Leave Period
Unit Reviewed
Number of Employees
Number of Timesheets Reviewed
Number of Missing
Timesheets
February 2019 1 7 7 0
March 2019 1 21 21 0
-
23 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
FINDING NO. 11 – Leave Activity and Correction Certification Forms Were Not Completed For All Leave Records Reviewed
Summary: The FPPC failed to provide completed Leave Activity and Correction
Certification forms for both units reviewed during the February and
March 2019 pay periods.
Criteria: Departments are responsible for maintaining accurate and timely
leave accounting records for their employees. (Cal. Code Regs., tit.
2, § 599.665.) Departments shall identify and record all errors found
using a Leave Activity and Correction form. (Human Resources
Manual Section 2101.) Furthermore, departments shall certify that all
leave records for the unit/pay period identified on the certification
form have been reviewed and all leave errors identified have been
corrected. (Ibid.)
Severity: Technical. Departments must document that they reviewed all leave
inputted into their leave accounting system to ensure accuracy and
timeliness. For post-audit purposes, the completion of Leave Activity
and Correction Certification forms demonstrates compliance with
CalHR policies and guidelines.
Cause: The FPPC acknowledges the errors noted in the findings, and has
updated internal procedures to ensure that the monthly internal audit
process is documented.
Corrective Action: Within 60 days of the date of this report, the FPPC must submit to the
SPB a written corrective action response which addresses the
corrections the department will implement to ensure that their
monthly internal audit process is documented. The FPPC must
incorporate completion of Leave Activity and Correction Certification
forms for all leave records even when errors are not identified or
corrected. Copies of relevant documentation demonstrating that the
corrective action has been implemented must be included with the
corrective action response.
-
24 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
Leave Reduction Efforts
Departments must create a leave reduction policy for their organization and monitor
employees’ leave to ensure compliance with the departmental leave policy; and ensure
employees who have significant “over-the-cap” leave balances have a leave reduction
plan in place. (Human Resources Manual Section 2124.)
Applicable Memorandums of Understanding and the California Code of Regulations
prescribe the maximum amount of vacation or annual leave permitted. “If a represented
employee is not permitted to use all of the vacation to which he or she is entitled in a
calendar year, the employee may accumulate the unused portion.”8 (Cal. Code Regs., tit.
2, § 599.737.) If it appears an excluded employee will have a vacation or annual leave
balance that will be above the maximum amount9 as of January 1 of each year, the
appointing power shall require the supervisor to notify and meet with each employee so
affected by the preceding July 1, to allow the employee to plan time off, consistent with
operational needs, sufficient to reduce their balance to the amount permitted by the
applicable regulation, prior to January 1. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.742.1.)
It is the intent of the state to allow employees to utilize credited vacation or annual leave
each year for relaxation and recreation, ensuring employees maintain the capacity to
optimally perform their jobs. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.742.1.) For excluded
employees, the employee shall also be notified by July 1 that, if the employee fails to take
off the required number of hours by January 1, the appointing power shall require the
employee to take off the excess hours over the maximum permitted by the applicable
regulation at the convenience of the agency during the following calendar year. (Ibid.) To
both comply with existing civil service rules and adhere to contemporary human resources
principles, state managers and supervisors must cultivate healthy work- life balance by
granting reasonable employee vacation and annual leave requests when operationally
feasible. (Human Resources Manual Section 2124.)
As of December 2018, three FPPC employees exceeded the established limits of
vacation or annual leave. The CRU reviewed those employees’ leave reduction plans to
ensure compliance with applicable laws, regulations and CalHR policy and guidelines,
which are listed below:
8 For represented employees, the established limit for annual or vacation leave accruals is 640 hours, however for Bargaining Unit 06 there is no established limit and for Bargaining Unit 05 the established limit is 816 hours. 9 Excluded employees shall not accumulate more than 80 days.
-
25 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
Classification Collective Bargaining Identifier
Total Hours Over Established Limit
Leave Reduction Plan
Provided
Attorney IV R02 36 Yes
CEA M01 244 Yes
Staff Services Manager I S01 240 Yes
Total 520
FINDING NO. 12 – Leave Reduction Plans Complied with Civil Service Laws, Board Rules, and CalHR Policies and Guidelines
The CRU reviewed employee vacation and annual leave to ensure that those employees
who have significant “over-the-cap” leave balances have a leave reduction plan in place
and are actively reducing hours. In addition, the CRU reviewed the department’s leave
reduction policy to verify its compliance with applicable rule and law, and to ensure its
accessibility to employees. Based on our review, the CRU found no deficiencies in this
area.
Policy and Processes
Nepotism
It is the policy of the State of California to recruit, hire and assign all employees on the
basis of merit and fitness in accordance with civil service statutes, rules and regulations.
(Human Resources Manual Section 1204.) Nepotism is expressly prohibited in the state
workplace because it is antithetical to California’s merit based civil service. (Ibid.)
Nepotism is defined as the practice of an employee using his or her influence or power to
aid or hinder another in the employment setting because of a personal relationship. (Ibid.)
Personal relationships for this purpose include but are not limited to, association by blood,
adoption, marriage and/or cohabitation. (Ibid.) In addition, there may be personal
relationships beyond this general definition that could be subject to these policies. (Ibid.)
All department nepotism policies should emphasize that nepotism is antithetical to a
merit-based personnel system and that the department is committed to the state policy of
recruiting, hiring and assigning employees on the basis of merit. (Ibid.)
-
26 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
FINDING NO. 13 – Nepotism Policy Complied with Civil Service Laws, Board Rules, and/or CalHR Policies and Guidelines
The CRU verified that the FPPC’s nepotism policy was disseminated to all staff and
emphasized the FPPC’s commitment to the state policy of recruiting, hiring and assigning
employees on the basis of merit. Additionally, the FPPC’s nepotism policy was comprised
of specific and sufficient components intended to prevent favoritism, or bias, based on a
personal relationship from unduly influencing employment decisions.
Workers’ Compensation
Employers shall provide to every new employee, either at the time of hire or by the end
of the first pay period, written notice concerning the rights, benefits, and obligations under
workers’ compensation law. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 9880 subd. (a).) This notice shall
include the right to predesignate their personal physician or medical group; a form that
the employee may use as an optional method for notifying the employer of the name of
employee’s “personal physician,” as defined by Labor Code section 4600. (Cal. Code
Regs., tit. 8, § 9880 subds. (c)(7) & (8).) Additionally, within one working day of receiving
notice or knowledge that the employee has suffered a work related injury or illness,
employers shall provide a claim form and notice of potential eligibility for benefits to the
injured employee. (Labor Code, § 5401 subd. (a).)
Public employers may choose to extend workers' compensation coverage to volunteers
that perform services for the organization. (Human Resources Manual Section 1415.)
Workers’ compensation coverage is not mandatory for volunteers as it is for employees.
(Ibid.) This is specific to the legally uninsured state departments participating in the
Master Agreement. (Ibid.) Departments with an insurance policy for workers’
compensation coverage should contact their State Compensation Insurance Fund (State
Fund) office to discuss the status of volunteers. (Ibid.) In this case, the FPPC did not
employ volunteers during the compliance review period.
FINDING NO. 14 – Workers’ Compensation Process Complied with Civil Service
Laws, Board Rules, and/or CalHR Policies and Guidelines
The CRU verified that the FPPC provides notice to their employees to inform them of their
rights and responsibilities under California’s Workers’ Compensation Law. Furthermore,
the CRU verified that when the FPPC received worker’s compensation claims, they
properly provided claim forms within one working day of notice or knowledge of injury.
-
27 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
Performance Appraisals
According to Government Code section 19992.2, subdivision (a), appointing powers must
“prepare performance reports.” Furthermore, California Code of Regulations, title 2,
section 599.798, directs supervisors to conduct written performance appraisals and
discuss overall work performance with permanent employees at least once in each twelve
calendar months after the completion of the employee’s probationary period.
The CRU selected 23 permanent FPPC employees to ensure that the department was
conducting performance appraisals on an annual basis in accordance with applicable
laws, regulations, policies and guidelines. These are listed below:
Classification Date Performance
Appraisals Due
Attorney IV 3/1/2019
Business Services Assistant 5/30/2019
FPPC Counsel 11/8/2018
FPPC Counsel 2/26/2019
FPPC Counsel - Enforcement 5/31/2019
Information Technology Specialist I 11/30/2018
Political Rerform Consultant II 7/31/2019
Political Rerform Consultant II 7/31/2019
Political Rerform Consultant II 10/3/2018
Political Rerform Consultant II 3/18/2019
Research Analyst I 2/28/2019
Special Investigator 12/31/2018
Special Investigator 5/19/2019
Special Investigator 8/18/2018
Special Investigator 5/31/2019
Senior Commission Counsel, FPPC 6/30/2019
Senior Commission Counsel Specialist, FPPC 9/15/2018
Staff Services Analyst 6/30/2018
Staff Services Analyst 10/9/2018
Staff Services Manager I 8/31/2018
Staff Services Manager I 12/31/2018
Staff Services Manager III 6/30/2019
Staff Services Manager III 1/31/2019
-
28 SPB Compliance Review Fair Political Practices Commission
FINDING NO. 15 – Performance Appraisals Were Not Provided to All Employees
Summary: The FPPC did not provide annual performance appraisals for all 23
employees after the completion of the employees’ probationary
period.
Criteria: Appointing powers shall prepare performance reports and keep them
on file as prescribed by department rule. (Gov. Code, § 19992.2,
subd. (a).) Each supervisor, as designated by the appointing power,
shall make an appraisal in writing and shall discuss with the
employee overall work performance at least once in each twelve
calendar months following the end of the employee's probationary
period. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.798.)
Severity: Serious. The department does not ensure that all of its employees
are apprised of work performance issues and/or goals in a
systematic manner.
Cause: The FPPC acknowledges that the 23 individuals identified did not
receive an annual evaluation after the completion of the probationary
period, which was the result of insufficient internal procedures.
Corrective Action: Within 60 days of the date of this report, the FPPC must submit to the
SPB a written corrective action response which addresses the
corrections the department will implement to ensure conformity with
Government Code section 19992.2 and California Code of
Regulations, title 2, section 599.798. Copies of relevant
documentation demonstrating that the corrective action has been
implemented must be included with the corrective action response.
DEPARTMENTAL RESPONSE
The FPPC’s response is attached as Attachment 1.
SPB REPLY
Based upon the FPPC’s written response, the FPPC will comply with the corrective
actions specified in these report findings. Within 60 days of the date of this report, a written
corrective action response including documentation demonstrating implementation of the
corrective actions specified must be submitted to the CRU.
-
Attachment 1STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION 1102 Q Street • Suite 3000 • Sacramento, CA 95811
February 26, 2020
Ms. Suzanne M. Ambrose, Executive Officer State Personnel Board 801 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO AUDIT FINDINGS
Dear Ms. Ambrose,
This letter is in response to the draft State Personnel Board (SPB), Compliance Review Report (CRR) submitted to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). The FPPC provides the following responses to the findings as presented by the SPB. ·
FINDING NO. 2 - Probationary Evaluations Were Not Timely
Cause: Under FPPC procedures, supervisors and managers are notified of the dates for submission of probationary reports, which ·are completed in a timely manner by supervisors and managers in the vast majority of cases. However, with· respect to the four individuals identified in the CRR, workload demands and mission-critical initiatives of their respective supervisors resulted in the untimely completion of probation reports.
Response: The FPPC has updated the internal procedures that track the status of employees' probationary reports more efficiently and will continue to emphasize the importance of completing probationary reports in a timely during future supervisor trainings.
FINDING NO. 4 - Unions were Not Notified of Personal Services Contract
Cause: The FPPC recognizes that, when entering into a personal services contract, Gov. Code sec. 19132 (b)(2) requires the FPPC to contact "all organizations that represent state employees who perform the type· of work to be contracted." With respect to the two contracts identified in the CRR, determined there were no organizations performing transcriptions services. Therefore, no organization was notified.
Response: The FPPC now understands that, in situations where no employee organization performs the work specified by a PSC, .FPPC will notify all employee organizations. The FPPC has updated its internal procedures accordingly.
-
FINDING NO. 5 - Ethics Training Was Not Provided for All Filers in a Timely Manner
Cause: The failure to timely provide ethics training to 8 new filers was due to insufficient internal procedures.
Response: The FPPC has implemented procedures to ensure that all new filers complete ethics training within six months of appointment. The FPPC notes that all eight persons identified in the CRR received ethics training (albeit in an untimely manner).
FINDING NO. 6 - Incorrect Application of Salary Determination Laws, Rules, and CalHR Policies and Guidelines for Appointment
Cause: 1. The incorrect salary determination for FPPC Counsel was the result of human error. It was incorrectly keyed in even though the amount in the supporting document was correct. 2. The incorrect salary determination for Staff Services Analyst resulted from an incorrect reading of the law, which the FPPC interpreted as allowing a 5% salary increase, resulting in an increase that was .54% above the allowable amount.
Response: The FPPC has updated its internal procedures in an attempt to improve the oversight of salary determination and implementation.
FINDING NO. 8 - Out of Class Pay Commenced before the 91st Day
Cause: The Political Reform Act mandates that the FPPC be permanently staffed with a General Counsel. Unique circumstances arose that presented the Hobson's choice of either having an attorney working out of class as General Counsel, or failing to execute its statutory mission.
Response: If presented with such unique circumstances in the future, the FPPC will solicit CalHR for guidance and direction.
FINDING NO. 11 - Leave Activity and Correction Certification Forms Were Not Completed For All Leave Records Reviewed
Cause: The FPPC acknowledges the errors noted in the findings for the three employees identified in the CRR.
Response: The FPPC has updated the internal procedure to ensure that the monthly internal audit process is documented.
-
FINDING NO. 15 - Performance Appraisals Were Not Provided to All Employees
Cause: The FPPC acknowledges that the 23 individuals identified in the CRR did not receive an annual evaluation after the completion of the probationary period.
Response: The FPPC has updated the internal procedure that tracks the status of employee performance appraisals and will emphasize the importance of the matter in future supervisor trainings. '
The FPPC appreciate the opportunity to provide a response to the compliance report. If you have any questions, please contact Loressa Hon, Chief of Administration at (916) 322-7578.
Sincerely,
Thomas Jones
Executive Director